Comments

farss wrote on 2/18/2006, 1:21 AM
As good as it gets I'd say. Should be the same as upconverting any 4:2:2 to HD.
However when they say "full HD" I'm wondering just what they mean, do they intend to print to tape and if so which tape format.
None of the broadcast HD decks are cheap and nor are PCs capable of keeping up.
If they've got a lot of this to do there are hardware boxes that do this, they do cost big time but when time is money....
Bob.
SimonW wrote on 2/18/2006, 5:27 AM
I think Algolith is a better upconverter, but only slightly.

I might try some better shots, but here are some I tried from an very low budget community drugs awareness video I made once. Original footage was from XDCAM in DVCAM mode.

http://www.simonwyndham.co.uk/algolith/algolith_comparison.htm
Logan5 wrote on 2/18/2006, 9:44 PM
Thanks Bob & Simon for your replies & the great samples.
Look like Vegas would suit their purpose great.
The HD up convert would be for web/FTP down load & future HD-DVD/Blue Ray use.

Thanks
Strategic
Spot|DSE wrote on 2/18/2006, 10:05 PM
I don't think Algolith is a better converter overall, it seems to lose color information in the process, but it's faster. It also has slightly better detail, but I think that's just the edge sharpening they're applying. It also could be something that is happening in the A/E processing. (I've never used it in Shake)
Really gotta step to hardware, IMO, if you want to beat what Vegas can do. Teranex has some really sweet new tools just now starting to ship, and S&W are better, but IMO not enough better to justify spending enough to buy 30 copies of Vegas. :-)
GlennChan wrote on 2/18/2006, 11:03 PM
The HD up convert would be for web/FTP down load
I'm curious: what's the point of that?
Coursedesign wrote on 2/18/2006, 11:31 PM
Watching on a computer?

Like more and more new training programs: screw the fuzzy standard definition DVD players and the wait for new $1800 HD players that may be unusable within 3 months because the first models don't support BD-J, the interactive language used to create the equivalent of DVD menus.

Just watch what you like on your PC in glorious high definition, with whatever resolution the creator finds optimal.

1023x859? Sure.
1600x1050? Why not.
HD color space? Easy.


Laurence wrote on 2/18/2006, 11:36 PM
I just did some Vegas up converting in a project with some HDV, some SD DV footage, and some photo montage animation. Up converting makes sense in this case. I can't see doing it for an SD only project. The hardware uprezzers in TVs and HD TVs do, if anything, a better job.
SimonW wrote on 2/19/2006, 5:46 PM
Hmm, hadn't noticed the colour loss.

The upconversions that I linked to had no extra edge sharpening. One reason I like Algolith better is because of the control over the process.

Speaking of Algolith, one thing that they do do which I think would be fantastic for Vegas is something similar to their mosquito noise/MPEG noise removal tool. It seems to work really nicely.

For most stuff Vegas can't be beaten very easily. Although I'm still suffering from exception errors in projects that use XDCAM MXF files.